Devils Advocate, naming and Shaming

[Graill]

Sooo,

As devils advocate I like to stir the pot a bit on the more popular theories and laws.

So we have a no naming and shaming clause in the TOS now. Who's idea was this? Was it the moderators or the developers? Do we have some bleeding heart wearing rose colored glasses or are one of the mods a griefer themselves and do not want to be discovered? Questions need to be raised.

During an interview FD plainly stated the community would get together to handle the Griefing in the game. Did I watch this interview incorrectly?

Ok, so just how do we test handling griefers? There is no way to get a large scale list of griefers in game except....these forums, why then would the moderators or developers not think this through before stating, "no name and shame"?

There is a disconnect somewhere. I think it is the moderators. Surely when the creator of this game states plainly and to the fact that players will communicate and band together to handle these griefers things should run smoothly, lists should be created, discussion on when to attack these people, why players in ED think they do this, and help threads to corner and take care of this abhorrent behavior.

Instead the moderators....or someone institute no name and shame. What are players to do, run around in dark closets in tiny groups whispering the names of those that cannot be named?

This is absurd. With the great inability to communicate during this test, listing names of griefers is the only way to communicate the threat they pose to the player base and the potential player base that interacts with these people.

You do not take away a weapon from one side and leave the other defenseless, and piecemeal communication between one person or tiny pockets of isolated players wont cut it either.

FD stated, for the record that griefers would be handled, from getting shoved into their own instance to a separate server, this cannot be done with "naming and shaming"the bleeding hearts fuzzily implemented.

These super moderators had better get with the developers and get some guidance on what this policy is doing.

There needs to be a thread on these forums for naming griefers. this is part of the testing of this community, to setup a network and have it in place before the game starts, isn't that the point of testing?

Demand a player defense network thread with names!!! (grin)

You all have a nice day now..y'hear.

 

[NeoRacer]

The nature of online gaming. As more people get their hands on this game you are gonna have to come to terms with the fact that, there are people way way WAYYY better than you. And they may not be mature, like..kids..who can and will whoop your b*** and gloat right in your face. It sucks but its reality.

 

[ubermick]

There probably should be some way of isolating people who are persistent troublemakers (and will be in the final version), but the issue is defining what causing trouble is. I've lost count of the amount of posts I've read the past few days complaining about being picked on by other players - but quite a few of those are people who are in situations where getting shot at should be expected. People at the distress call area or in the combat zones are going to shoot at you if you're on the other side. That said, jumping players who just appear and have no way of defending themselves, or attacking your own faction members is griefing - and while that's to be expected somewhat in the final game, we shouldn't be seeing it in beta testing.

There are definitely some folks out there now who are playing purely for their own personal pleasure (and not saying we shouldn't be enjoying ourselves) as opposed to participating in what we all signed up for, which is to test the game in preparation for the final release.

 

[Graill]

heh, just putting a bit of humor into the conversation. The issue at hand is naming and shaming and setting up a player network to identify these people as per FD and his interview. There is nothing wrong with what these players do in game, there should be nothing wrong with other players listing names and locations to get a defense network going.....

After all FD is the one suggesting it.

..oh, oh wait, I get it now (slaps noggin) WE...cant grief the griefers. OK that's sorted.

 

[Asp Explorer]

The nature of online gaming. As more people get their hands on this game you are gonna have to come to terms with the fact that, there are people way way WAYYY better than you. And they may not be mature, like..kids..who can and will whoop your b*** and gloat right in your face. It sucks but its reality.

It may be reality, but it's not right and it's not good. And smacking those snerts is a pleasure in and of itself

Some peeps may need to read up on basics.

http://www.microsoft.com/resources/documentation/windows/xp/all/proddocs/en-us/route.mspx?mfr=true a good place to start.

EDIT: Snert = Snotty nosed egotistical rude teenager.

 

[Andrew Sayers]

how do we test handling griefers?

Naming individuals doesn't help because it hinders people trying to turn over a new leaf, it doesn't protect against new people using the same tactics, players can currently change name and it doesn't provide Frontier with enough information to counter existing or future attacks.

If you experience behaviour in the game that you believe to be griefing, please describe the specific behaviour you see, why you believe it is griefing, and how players (or Frontier) would counter it.

 

[Cosmos]

heh, just putting a bit of humor into the conversation. The issue at hand is naming and shaming and setting up a player network to identify these people as per FD and his interview. There is nothing wrong with what these players do in game, there should be nothing wrong with other players listing names and locations to get a defense network going.....

After all FD is the one suggesting it.

..oh, oh wait, I get it now (slaps noggin) WE...cant grief the griefers. OK that's sorted.

Er no.. what you are suggesting is some sort of witch hunt. So you had your ship destroyed by a player, thats not griefing and frankly as I have stated elsewhere there are options for players that takes a little bit of effort and you've come up with a way to combat any aggressors. And whats more you might enjoy the game better, playing it with other people is fun.

 

[Cosmos]

It may be reality, but it's not right and it's not good. And smacking those snerts is a pleasure in and of itself

Some peeps may need to read up on basics.

http://www.microsoft.com/resources/documentation/windows/xp/all/proddocs/en-us/route.mspx?mfr=true a good place to start.

EDIT: Snert = Snotty nosed egotistical rude teenager.

I've seen this elsewhere and even DB made negative reference to 'teenagers'. I find it repugnant that people in the community feel its okay to label younger gamers in this way.

To be brutally honest, I think David Braben is responsible for all this bemoaning of 'griefing' with everyone jumping on the band wagon.. I can't remember ever hearing the word used before joining the ED community, and boy has everyone made up for it since.

 

[Asp Explorer]

I've seen this elsewhere and even DB made negative reference to 'teenagers'. I find it repugnant that people in the community feel its okay to label younger gamers in this way.

To be brutally honest, I think David Braben is responsible for all this bemoaning of 'griefing' with everyone jumping on the band wagon.. I can't remember ever hearing the word used before joining the ED community, and boy has everyone made up for it since.

We're not against teenagers - everyone is equal in my book!

Of course, is someone is snotty nosed, egotistical and rude, I won't like them no matter how old they are.

 

[Cody]

I can't remember ever hearing the word used before joining the ED community...

You are having a laugh, yes?

 

[SAB380]

I've seen this elsewhere and even DB made negative reference to 'teenagers'. I find it repugnant that people in the community feel its okay to label younger gamers in this way.

To be brutally honest, I think David Braben is responsible for all this bemoaning of 'griefing' with everyone jumping on the band wagon.. I can't remember ever hearing the word used before joining the ED community, and boy has everyone made up for it since.

If you haven't heard the word griefing before, you haven't been on a game forum before. Its as simple as that.

I do think here people are over sensitive about being killed by players and label almost anything they don't like as griefing.

 

[Cosmos]

You are having a laugh, yes?

Not at all, but then I don't generally get upset about the actions of other people in a computer game.

If you haven't heard the word griefing before, you haven't been on a game forum before. Its as simple as that.

I do think here people are over sensitive about being killed by players and label almost anything they don't like as griefing.

I agree people are ridiculously over sensitive. Its baffling in all honesty. I have an extensive gaming background and have played many online games. Yes I know of the word but I've never heard it so abused as it has been here.

Instead of people moaning and complaining, it might be a much better idea to use that energy in a constructive solution to these perceived problems.. Someone blowing up your ship is not griefing by any stretch of the imagination.

 

[Katkon]

Because it gets out of hand, quickly. It's also virtually impossible to determine whether real "griefing" took place or just general PvP.

Case in point. Player 1, a more experienced player, is hanging out in Fed Distress Signal zone shooting NPCs. Player 2, a new player, arrives and chooses the opposite side. Player 1 immediately notices a human enemy, and targets him as quickly as possible for fear that he will do the same. The new players doesn't even get a shot in and blows up. The new player rushes to the forum, complains that he's been ganked, griefed or whatever - when it was as simple as regular PvP. Do we really want the mods and the community spending time judging these types of encounters?

My vote is a resounding no.

 

[DazzyB]

Political correctness gone mad! But, with respect to the OP... 'Hear hear!'. I'm all for the naming and shaming... it didn't make me cry "Abuse!" when I was younger. On the contrary - it taught me a lesson!

 

[Cosmos]

Political correctness gone mad! But, with respect to the OP... 'Hear hear!'. I'm all for the naming and shaming... it didn't make me cry "Abuse!" when I was younger. On the contrary - it taught me a lesson!

Hmm.. Comments not directed towards you but,

The forums would rather quickly descend into a flame war and you know there is another side to this whole situation, and if we are going to promote naming and shaming then it should go that those being named can retort, and I don't think a truthful response would really go down well either.

There are far too many juvenile complaints about having ones ship destroyed, in a computer game, with an immediate reaction to chuck toys of out pram and make yet another I was griefed post. I've never seen such a constant level of reactionary whining in my whole life and I have seen my fair share of epic QQ threads over the years.

As I suggested, instead of getting upset get even, team up with friends to resolve any difficulties. Its a game after all.

 

[JackWeaver]

Sooo,

As devils advocate I like to stir the pot a bit on the more popular theories and laws.

So we have a no naming and shaming clause in the TOS now. Who's idea was this? Was it the moderators or the developers? Do we have some bleeding heart wearing rose colored glasses or are one of the mods a griefer themselves and do not want to be discovered? Questions need to be raised.

There is no naming and shaming as FD do not want forums to become a mob court. The objective is that undesirable behaviour in game should be dealt with in game by game mechanics.

You are perfectly welcome to discuss what constitutes undesirable behaviour and suggest ways of dealing with it, that is the feedback that FD want so that they can create the game mechanics to deal with it.

 

[M.E.A.T]

There is no naming and shaming as FD do not want forums to become a mob court. The objective is that undesirable behaviour in game should be dealt with in game by game mechanics.

You are perfectly welcome to discuss what constitutes undesirable behaviour and suggest ways of dealing with it, that is the feedback that FD want so that they can create the game mechanics to deal with it.

Correct. The whole point for this rule is to prevent this forum from turning into flame war.

 

[devastat]

FD stated, for the record that griefers would be handled, from getting shoved into their own instance to a separate server, this cannot be done with "naming and shaming"the bleeding hearts fuzzily implemented.

The game handles this problem by itself. Given there are thousands of players, and the eight player instances that we currently have, it is very unlikely you meet the same person twice in the game.

 

[mattyboy1509]

I think i must have a different version of the game granted my broadbands not the best.
I think in the 3 months I have been playing this game I have been griefed once.
I have killed 3 players and been killed by maybe 5 or 6 other players but they were all in the combat zones and all on the other side.
I have never been griefed at a station in fact the one time I eas griefed was in a combat zone he was just meant to be on my side.
With regard to naming and shaming it could easily get out of hand now,if you were to show video evidence...

 

[Yaffle]

Just a quick point on naming, I would like to salute the awesomely named Commander to the Bridge I saw yesterday at Azeban.

I have no idea who you are, but I nearly crashed due to laughing when I read your name.

Absolute genius.